Activision, id, and Raven announce that Quake 4 is now available in the U.S.:

THE WAR BEGINS QUAKE 4 PC DEPLOYED TO STORES NATIONWIDE

Santa Monica, CA – October 18, 2005 – The Global Defense Force has been given
the green light to invade the Strogg home planet as id Software™ and Activision,
Inc. (Nasdaq: ATVI) announced today that QUAKE 4™ for the PC has shipped. The
long-awaited sequel to QUAKE II®, QUAKE 4 enlists gamers in the role of Matthew
Kane, a member of the legendary Rhino Squad, to penetrate deep into the heart of
the Strogg war machine and engage in a series of heroic missions to destroy the
barbaric alien race. QUAKE 4 for the PC is available at retail outlets
nationwide for a suggested retail price of $49.99. Additionally, fans can
purchase the QUAKE 4 Special DVD Edition for a suggested retail price of $59.99,
which includes QUAKE II, the QUAKE II expansion packs, and exclusive
behind-the-scenes content. Both versions carry an “M” (Mature) rating by the
ESRB.

“Fans can now buy QUAKE 4 and jump right into the epic battle between mankind
and the Strogg,” said Todd Hollenshead, CEO, id Software. “The single-player
campaign has the excitement and feel of a blockbuster action movie, complimented
by an addicting multiplayer component featuring all the speed and excitement of
QUAKE III Arena®.”

Developed by Raven Software and executive produced by id Software, QUAKE 4
begins only moments after the events of QUAKE II, with the Earth’s fleet
launching a massive offensive to the planet Stroggos. As Matthew Kane, gamers
invade the alien stronghold, fighting alone, along side other Marines, and in
mechanized walkers and hover tanks as they encounter the Strogg and their
disturbing amalgamations of man and machine. Built on id Software’s
revolutionary DOOM 3® technology, QUAKE 4 also features fast-paced multiplayer
competition modeled after the speed, style, and feel of QUAKE III Arena®.

I am glad you see that point as obvious because that idiot Bhuric did not.

That isn't the issue now is it? You know full well what "aspect", as you call it, of innovation he was referring to you fascist prick. Innovative in a broader sense of the word, ok.

Memory management was his example, not mine. I just rebutted it. In addition, he wrote that Half-Life 2 was NOT innovative. Without any clarification (which he did not include with the statement), "not innovative" means not innovative at all or in any way. That is why I replied and wrote that he would be hearing from the "Half-Life 2 has innovative facial animation" crowd because of his statement.

Try not to let your habit of bloating comments with superfluous nothingness distract from whatever miniscule point you're desperately fighting for ground over.

Bhuric chose to have the argument over semantics by challenging my posts on those grounds.

So far, we've learned that Quake 4 is a really great yet shitty game, not worth the paltry $50. FEAR is a derivative masterpiece also not worth a mere $50. HL2's facial animations are still woefully terrific. Celestial Toad is framing his id software shareholder's certificate. Riley Pitz is still looking to find a fellow contrarian worthy of his forensic skills. Derek Smart has submitted an application.

Goofiness aside, I'm currently halfway through FEAR and I think it's pretty well done. The immersion and creepiness reminds me of System Shock 2, however, it has some pretty big clipping issues; enemies behind me can often see through the wall I have my back against. But that's really the only flaw so far and it's not a showstopper. I'm very much enjoying saving my game before firefights, then going back to replay them and the devs are right...it never is the same. Kinda like FarCry, which rocks like a cockfight.

Holy fuck... I just noticed this thread was 290 odd posts long... how did I miss this?!?!

Looks like we have a perfect example of a retard arguing with someone with some brains that for some reason likes arguing with retards.

Does arguing with a retard, make you a retard even if you've got brains? If you were smart then you wouldn't argue with a retard would you? So maybe arguing with a retard does makes you a retard as well? Or maybe it's just for entertainment... if you had brains and you argued with a retard for entertainment purposes then that wouldn't make you a retard as well... it would make you a prick...

Ok, so we need to have a vote here, does arguing with a retard, if you have brains, make you a retard as well or just a prick? Or perhaps something else?

For the record I enjoy arguing with retards on occasion... so that makes me a prick or a retard on occasion myself.

I know you brought up Tron 2.0 which is a sweet game, but i'm wondering if The Chronicles of Riddick came out before Sh!t-Life 2? This game I think came out for X-Box first but it has good face express stuff. Damm good game too just playing through now cant belive I missed this game.

I wasn't expecting to like the game. I was bored and had already beaten F.E.A.R. so I figured I'd give it a shot.

In short, it's great. There' not much depth but a little side story which was done alright. Spoiler "You start out as a famous hero that everyone admires. Then you get turned into a Strog/cyborg by the enemy and even your friends turn on you.".

It was fun for a mindless shooter and looked pretty good. I was surprised how well it ran as Doom3 ran a little slower.

"Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you." -Fry, Futurmama

"Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you." -Fry, Futurama

Tsk tsk... now Riley Troll... erm, I mean Pitz, you know that this isn't a HL2 and Steam thread. Save your unadulterated BS for the other thread that DOES pertain to HL2 if you please. There, that's a good troll, erm, I mean good boy!

Tsk tsk... now Riley Troll... erm, I mean Pitz, you know that this isn't a HL2 and Steam thread. Save your unadulterated BS for the other thread that DOES pertain to HL2 if you please. There, that's a good troll, erm, I mean good boy!

“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” - Mahatma Gandhi

I need a demo...not to see if I like the game or not. I already know I will do little more than scratch the surface of the single player portion - it's the multiplayer that has my mouth watering. The fact-paced, crisp netcode, non-stop action is what I crave. I used to get all that with Quake 3 and reading how similar the MP in Q4 is to Q3 in all these reviews just makes my mouth water. So why a demo? To see how the game runs on my system, of course!

I can't believe the lengths that you'll stretch to in a futile attempt to defend your positions.

From your past posts, I certainly can believe the narrow view you have of the meaning of words. Innovative does not simply mean original in subject matter regardless of whether YOU think it does. If something has any aspect which is new, it IS innovative at least in that aspect.

You know, HL2 might have used some completely new technique in memory management. It might have made memory manipulation 10x easier and safer.

However, in no way would that make HL2, the game, innovative.

LOL! More myopic, semantics nonsense from you. If Half-Life 2 has new memory management, then yes, it would be innovative in that aspect even if the gameplay aspect is not innovative.

My posting here has nothing to do with caring about you or your opinions. Don't flatter yourself.

"I don't care what you say, but I am replying to it anyway." LOL!

No wonder you lost the other argument

I didn't lose the argument. My videos from Tron 2.0 proved that the characters in Tron also had facial animation which displayed emotion which were of no less quality than Half-Life 2's.

However, they never claimed it was unique, they just claimed it was successful and the best.

LOL! Being the best would make it unique. You mistakenly seem to think that something must be unique in subject matter to be unique. If something stands out above all others for any reason, i.e. "being without equal", it is unique.

You really need to consult a dictionary and broaden your vocabulary. Many words have more than the one narrow meaning you know.

It is you who obviously needs to consult a dictionary more often (and not just on this occasion). Innovative means characterized by something new. If something is of the best quality ever, then that is a NEW height in quality, hence it IS innovative.

I can't believe the lengths that you'll stretch to in a futile attempt to defend your positions. A "new height in quality" somehow being innovative. That's just rich.

But you didn't have to do that for me, I already knew you didn't know what innovative means. I guess it's always nice to have more evidence to prove it.

It does not make in original in subject matter, but it can make it original or otherwise innovative if it is of unparalleled quality or created using a new, i.e. innovative, technique or method.

You know, HL2 might have used some completely new technique in memory management. It might have made memory manipulation 10x easier and safer.

However, in no way would that make HL2, the game, innovative. So, no, once again you are wrong.

If you don't care, don't reply.

My posting here has nothing to do with caring about you or your opinions. Don't flatter yourself.

You need to read the previous thread on the subject in its entirety then because others stated in it that HL2 was unique in its use of facial animations to display emotion and that the facial animation system itself was unique in its ease of implementation.

No wonder you lost the other argument, you didn't even understand it. I've already conceded the point they were making - that the facial expressions (and the underlying animation system) are better than any other game to-date. However, they never claimed it was unique, they just claimed it was successful and the best. Which it was.

I suggest you look up what "innovative" means. Having the best quality of something doesn't make it innovative - it makes it derivative.

It is you who obviously needs to consult a dictionary more often (and not just on this occasion). Innovative means characterized by something new. If something is of the best quality ever, then that is a NEW height in quality, hence it IS innovative.

Quality doesn't make something original.

It does not make in original in subject matter, but it can make it original or otherwise innovative if it is of unparalleled quality or created using a new, i.e. innovative, technique or method.

I don't care in the slightest what you are willing to concede. I was making a response to the criticism that others might argue against my position. You and your opinions have no bearing on that whatsoever.

As I told you before, the comments I make in posts are what I choose to make. If you don't care, don't reply.

However, unless someone tries to make the point that HL2 actually does so, which no one has done to this point, there's no point considering it.

You need to read the previous thread on the subject in its entirety then because others stated in it that HL2 was unique in its use of facial animations to display emotion and that the facial animation system itself was unique in its ease of implementation. I don't agree with the former claim, but it was stated nonetheless.

but even being simply called the best would still make them innovative in some way like quality

I suggest you look up what "innovative" means. Having the best quality of something doesn't make it innovative - it makes it derivative. The best synonym for "innovative" (in the context being used here) would be "original". Quality doesn't make something original.

By the way, I don't concede that they were THE best

I don't care in the slightest what you are willing to concede. I was making a response to the criticism that others might argue against my position. You and your opinions have no bearing on that whatsoever.

Simply using them, no, but the actual implementation could still be innovative such as in technique or quality.

It is possible to come up with innovative uses of facial expressions. However, unless someone tries to make the point that HL2 actually does so, which no one has done to this point, there's no point considering it.

No actually you didn't really point that out, and if you thought your price assessment was useless when you wrote it, then why did you write it in the first place?

your assertion that the level design based upon that is equally useless, eh?

No actually if they chose to make the demo a "mishmash" of the game then they must have chosen what they thought were some good parts of the game, and therefore the demo is very representative of the overall level design. And I think it sucks. But again that's my opinion.

been here arguing nonstop with those of us that aren't interested in it.

No actually I've merely been offering a counterpoint OPINION of Quake 4 in response to those who blast the game relentlessly and talk about other games like FEAR as being superior. (to them)

Just because something is based on something old does not mean it shouldn't advance. Hey, Peter Jackson is remaking King Kong. I guess he should use the same technology for the special effects, right? Updating would be bad, eh?

Your analogy doesn't really work because the special effects have nothing to do with the gameplay. Quake 4 uses the Doom 3 engine, which is not old special effects, so your analogy is useless.

I did not have low expectations for Quake 4. I had very high expectations, and it exceeded them for me.

No one cares

If no one cares then why are you posting in response to me? And why is this thread nearly 300 posts long now? And why do you continue to ignore certain parts of my posts while focusing on whatever lines you think you can best argue against?

Every single post you've made is knocking other games in an attempt to prove that Quake 4 is the best game you've ever played.

No, as I've now said twenty-three thousand times, I'm stating my opinion of Quake 4 and my opinion of the other games, as a counterpoint to some of the negativity about the game that comes up here. It's okay for people to blast it, but if someone defends it then we can't have that can we?

refusal to admit maybe some parts of Q4 aren't as much fun as they could be

You don't read very carefully do you? I wrote this line in my last post:

Quake 4 is not repetitive until the last few levels, where it kind of feels like they tried to drag it out a little too long just to make it longer

For someone so incredibly concerned with how useless the opinions of reviewers are you're very concerned with me believing your opinion of the game as being proper.

I didn't say the reviewers opinions were useless. Again, you don't read carefully. I said that the reviewer's opinions are not more valuable than anyone else's because their thoughts are printed in a magazine or website.

You're overblowing the game to the point that no game could live up to it.

No actually I just wrote my "overblown" opinion of the game, and I said repeatedly that I'm probably not objective about it since I loved Quake 2 and Doom 3 so much. But go ahead and continue to ignore all of that.

And I was blasting F.E.A.R., but that was also my opinion, and I was mostly just responding to people who posted a short mindless message stating how F.E.A.R. was the best, blah blah blah, and someone is insane to think Quake 4 is better, etc.

CTQuake 4 is BETTER, no F.E.A.R. is BETTER, no HL2 is BETTER, no Far-Cry is BETTER, no BF2 is BETTER, etc.

Considering the fact that you've never even played Quake 4, that makes your price assessment 100% useless.

Considering I went on to point this out, your response is useless. Also, considering FEAR's demo wasn't a true level but a mishmash, your assertion that the level design based upon that is equally useless, eh?

And as I've stated before, the Quake monsters should engage you in a straight up frontal fight, especially a Quake 2 sequel, which is exactly what they do.

Just because something is based on something old does not mean it shouldn't advance. Hey, Peter Jackson is remaking King Kong. I guess he should use the same technology for the special effects, right? Updating would be bad, eh?

In fact I haven't seen or played levels this dull in years. I'm seriously bored with the levels, I mean, there is just nothing impressive in any of them.

For someone so incredibly concerned with how useless the opinions of reviewers are you're very concerned with me believing your opinion of the game as being proper.

Read my typing - Quake 4 looks boring to me. You like it. that's fine, but you've been here arguing nonstop with those of us that aren't interested in it. Just because you like and do not like FEAR does not mean others shouldn't be the other way around if they so choose. Every single post you've made is knocking other games in an attempt to prove that Quake 4 is the best game you've ever played. No one cares. Other people find it dull. Reviewers are mixed, some finding it dull. You seem to take offense to this. Unless you have something personally vested in the game, you're just wasting your time arguing with people and telling them they are wrong for not liking it.

Again, as I have not played this game, nor FEAR, and have little intention of playing either until the prices fall, I could care less about them, I just find it great that you keep talking about how opinions are useless yet you refuse to let others have one.

Because you've already decided that you don't like this game, you're not objective about it at all, and your thoughts of the game as you play it will probably be affected negatively by all the bitching and drivel on this ever continuing written pissing contest about Quake 4. And sadly I have contributed to it. That being said, I'm going to return to playing Quake 4 on the 4th difficulty level, blasting Strogg, and occasionally playing the multiplayer. You go do whatever makes you happy and we will just agree to disagree about this game.

Not true, low expectations usually make a game better, as its easier to meet them. I had more or less figured Far Cry would suck due to the lame plot. I was very wrong about it and the game surprised me. I was more or less convinced HL2 would be great due to the pedigree. Turns out it sucked me in much less than Far Cry or the original HL.

However, your staunch defense of Q4, with the refusal to allow opposing views and the refusal to admit maybe some parts of Q4 aren't as much fun as they could be have certainly turned me off. You're overblowing the game to the point that no game could live up to it.

If I recall, you've mentioned reviews constantly. Maybe it wasn't you, but I believe it was.

No actually I never mention reviews until someone else does, and only then as a counterpoint to whatever other reviews are used in the discussion.

And I don't care about formatting. If italics are too hard, well, try harder.

I was trying to be nice and let you learn something I just learned, but I guess you can't handle that. I also find it interesting that you have used the quotation command in this latest post of yours even though you say you don't care about formatting.

Considering the fact that you've never even played Quake 4, that makes your price assessment 100% useless.

I haven't played it and will wait for a demo, but the movies were unimpressive. Levels looked dull, AI looked mindless.

Oh sure, you can tell SO MUCH about the A.I. from watching a 60 second video. And as I've stated before, the Quake monsters should engage you in a straight up frontal fight, especially a Quake 2 sequel, which is exactly what they do. I'm playing through Quake 4 on the fourth difficulty now, and I've seen monsters roll forward, duck, strafe, run away, take cover, work together with their firing angles, jump around doorways to get me when I'm crouching, flank me, and come up behind me. Raven should have hired you to write the A.I. code for Quake 4 and I'm sure it would have been vastly superior.

And I can tell you all about how dull the levels are. I'm on my second time through the game now, and boy are the level designs really dull. In fact I haven't seen or played levels this dull in years. I'm seriously bored with the levels, I mean, there is just nothing impressive in any of them. They mostly consist of low geometry BSP and lots of right angles in the boxlike corridors and completely flat 1996-esque environments. I don't know how I'm making myself go through it this second time with these dull levels... please... spare yourself and don't ever play these dull levels.

The videos are the number one reason I bought the game. I thought they kicked ass. But again, spare yourself from the terrible game that is Quake 4 and indulge in your F.E.A.R. nonsense or Far Cry or whatever the hell you want to play.

FEAR at least has AI, one of the most important things to me

I didn't see any great A.I. going on in the demo. Nothing noticeably better or even equal to what I've seen the Strogg do in Quake 4.

but all the reviews say the levels are nearly as repetitive as Doom 3, which means the best AI in the world likely couldn't keep me interested enough to finish the game.

Quake 4 is not repetitive until the last few levels, where it kind of feels like they tried to drag it out a little too long just to make it longer... but the first three fourths of the game really has variety and each area is unique, different vehicles, different objectives, changing/upgraded weapons, new monsters, new player attributes... so it isn't repetitive even if you are blasting the hell out of Strogg all the time.

And when the Quake 4 demo comes out, you aren't going to like anything about it. No matter how good it is. Why? Because you've already decided that you don't like this game, you're not objective about it at all, and your thoughts of the game as you play it will probably be affected negatively by all the bitching and drivel on this ever continuing written pissing contest about Quake 4. And sadly I have contributed to it. That being said, I'm going to return to playing Quake 4 on the 4th difficulty level, blasting Strogg, and occasionally playing the multiplayer. You go do whatever makes you happy and we will just agree to disagree about this game. even though you are totally wrong about itAmen.

I wouldn't exactly class enemies jumping over rails or through windows as 'AI'. I haven't seen AI improve in any significant way since Half-Life introduced those human soldiers... FEAR's AI is far too gimmicky and that all the soldiers are the same means they completely lack any personality or individuality, resulting in the same tired routine from every soldier.

I wish other aspects of FPS's kept up with graphics, as it seems that AI, storytelling and sound/music often get left behind.